LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 1 DECEMBER 2017
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.
For Bail Application
Adye Wells
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
SAML
For Bail Consent
JRM
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Garry Maxwell Billinghurst
Christopher Adam Leaman
Adam Arnold Jones
(Part-Heard)
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Sentence
Jamie Dean Sharman
Brodie John Geoffrey Crossin
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
BC
John Waclaw Kurzyp
Jacob Allan Daureen
For Bail Consent
Bradley Daniel Ford
Danny Leigh Morgan
Nathan John Garth
For Facts and Sentence
Daniel Andrew Graham
BLW
For Plea
Lee Charles Cobern
Nicholas Tyson Wallner
For Bail Application
Aleesha May McKnight
2:00 p.m.
For Sentence
Cori Leigh Braslin
Matthew John Geeves
2:15 p.m.
For Facts and Sentence
Damon Kenneth Adams
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Hearing
Vanessa Lee Wolf
v
Director of Prisons
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
Kerry Alexander Bilston
BURNIE
NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)
MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:
subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:
- AGLC
- Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 1 December 2017 [2017] TASSCCourtlist 281
- Case
- [2017] TASSCCourtlist 281
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issue the court was required to decide was whether the plaintiff, Vanessa Lee Wolf, had been unlawfully detained by the Director of Prisons, the defendant. The court needed to examine the circumstances of the plaintiff's detention, and whether it complied with the relevant legal standards and provisions.
Justice GEASON examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, and considered the relevant legal principles and authorities. The court concluded that the detention of the plaintiff was lawful, and dismissed the plaintiff's claim. The court found that the Director of Prisons had acted within their legal powers, and that the detention was justified under the circumstances. The plaintiff's claim was therefore unsuccessful.
The final orders of the court were that the plaintiff's claim be dismissed, and that the plaintiff bear the costs of the proceeding. The court did not award any costs to the defendant.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.